mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Automated Theorem Provers Help Improve Large Language Model Reasoning

arXiv 2408.03492 ↗First posted 7 Aug 2024cs.AI cs.CLcited by 7

On the map: LLM reasoning → Reasoning benchmarks and evaluation

Abstract (arXiv)

In this paper we demonstrate how logic programming systems and Automated first-order logic Theorem Provers (ATPs) can improve the accuracy of Large Language Models (LLMs) for logical reasoning tasks where the baseline performance is given by direct LLM solutions. We first evaluate LLM reasoning on steamroller problems using the PRONTOQA benchmark. We show how accuracy can be improved with a neuro-symbolic architecture where the LLM acts solely as a front-end for translating a given problem into a formal logic language and an automated reasoning engine is called for solving it. However, this approach critically hinges on the correctness of the LLM translation. To assess this translation correctness, we secondly define a framework of syntactic and semantic error categories. We implemented the framework and used it to identify errors that LLMs make in the benchmark domain. Based on these findings, we thirdly extended our method with capabilities for automatically correcting syntactic and semantic errors. For semantic error correction we integrate first-order logic ATPs, which is our main and novel contribution. We demonstrate that this approach reduces semantic errors significantly and further increases the accurracy of LLM logical reasoning.

Key facts. Cited by 7 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in Reasoning benchmarks and evaluation, one of 17 directions in LLM reasoning. Builds on 10 of its 33 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 7 Aug 2024.

Builds on

10 of 33 references.

Closest ancestors · 2

Same direction, newest first

  1. 2023Are Large Language Models Really Good Logical Reasoners? A Comprehensive Evaluation and Beyond16 Jun
  2. 2023Certified Deductive Reasoning with Language Models6 Jun

Other references · 8

  1. 2023Gemini: A Family of Highly Capable Multimodal Modelscited by 810
  2. 2020Generative Language Modeling for Automated Theorem Provingcited by 379
  3. 2024Large Legal Fictions: Profiling Legal Hallucinations in Large Language Modelscited by 144
  4. 2023Neural Probabilistic Logic Programming in Discrete-Continuous Domainscited by 24
  5. 2023Language Models with Rationalitycited by 15
  6. 2023Reliable Natural Language Understanding with Large Language Models and Answer Set Programmingcited by 12
  7. 2018DeepProbLog: Neural Probabilistic Logic Programmingcited by 5
  8. 2023Bottom-Up Stratified Probabilistic Logic Programming with Fusematecited by 2

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2025: 4; 2026: 3.

7 papers.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2024Steamroller Problems: An Evaluation of LLM Reasoning Capability with Automated Theorem Prover Strategies
  2. 2025Beyond Correctness: Exposing LLM-generated Logical Flaws in Reasoning via Multi-step Automated Theorem Proving
  3. 2023Logic-LM: Empowering Large Language Models with Symbolic Solvers for Faithful Logical Reasoning
  4. 2025Can Large Language Models Learn Formal Logic? A Data-Driven Training and Evaluation Framework
  5. 2024A Closer Look at Logical Reasoning with LLMs: The Choice of Tool Matters
  6. 2024Proof of Thought : Neurosymbolic Program Synthesis allows Robust and Interpretable Reasoning
  7. 2025FormalMATH: Benchmarking Formal Mathematical Reasoning of Large Language Models
  8. 2025AutoLogi: Automated Generation of Logic Puzzles for Evaluating Reasoning Abilities of Large Language Models